The term ‘domestic abuse’ as opposed to ‘domestic violence’ is meant to encompass the wider forms of suffering over and above physical injuries which women (and men) are exposed to from partners. Many people are in ‘unhealthy’ relationships; that does not necessarily equate to being involved in an abusive relationship but confusion may occur if the definition of this crime is broadened. Would ‘domestic abuse’ rather ‘domestic violence’ mean the criminalisation of bad relationships and remove focus from the true nature of this crime? Is it simple semantics or would broadening definitions from ‘domestic violence’ to ‘domestic abuse’ encourage changes in society’s perception of domestic violence and who precisely is likely to be involved?

According to the dictionary, abuse is “v. 1. use to bad effect or for a bad purpose 2. treat with cruelty or violence 3. address in an insulting and offensive way” whilst violence is: “n. 1. behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage or kill 2. strength of emotion or of a destructive natural force” Being offensive and cruel can, however, cause harm – particularly if there is a physical element implied or if there is a history of physical harm following on from, or alongside, verbal insults. There are interesting subdivisions of both the terms ‘abuse’ and ‘violence’. For example, in research undertaken by the Home Office, definitions of domestic violence were dependent on victims’ interpretations. If various agencies use different terms, how it is possible to specify what is, or is not, unacceptable behaviour and thus whether such behaviour constitutes a criminal offense.

So what is domestic violence? In essence, it is where a current or former partner causes physical or emotional harm or injury to the other; where one partner is forced, either physically or emotionally, to submit to the will of the other (whether the perpetrator is male and victim female, or vice versa, or both partners are of the same gender). Whilst many may consider domestic violence to consist of physical assaults by a husband upon their wife, this is not an exclusive definition. Aside from physical assaults, there are emotional, financial and social constraints placed by one partner upon the other and this can be a particular problem if one partner is the only working adult or if he or she earns substantially more than their partner. Emotional abuse can be where one partner constantly makes derogatory remarks, belittling achievements and physical appearance; social constraints can include manipulation of one’s movements with constant questions about where someone is going. Verbal assaults can almost cause as much fear as physical assaults; this is especially so when assaults of any kind are directed not only towards the primary victim (i.e. partner/ex-partner) but also towards children, pets or other loved ones. Further, if verbal assaults or threats are often followed by physical assaults, victimisation occurs on another level as the apprehension of a physical attack can be as traumatic as the assault itself.

The Home Office itself defines domestic violence as: “Any violence between current or former partners in an intimate relationship, wherever and whenever the violence occurs…[it] may include physical, sexual, emotional or financial abuse”. This may, however, be purely to obtain specific information on victims rather than any legally or obligatory definition to be used in strict interpretation by agencies (including criminal justice agencies). Given that it interchanges violence and abuse, confusion may occur, and it broadens further its definition in a leaflet against domestic violence. The leaflet describes the more obvious of ‘punching’ and ‘kicking’ to the more debatable ‘telling you that you’re ugly’, ‘telling you what to wear’, ‘calling you a failure’ and ‘shouting’. These latter phrases and definitions are so broad they may in fact undermine their purpose. Pragmatic interpretations may be obvious to policymakers, academics and researchers and perhaps even the police (in that the derogatory comments and shouting are part of a pattern of abusive behaviour, rather than when used in an isolated incident) but leaflets and campaigns seen by the wider public may result in the meaning being lost. This is because, during arguments and disagreements – in various relationships – shouting and making derogatory remarks can be quite common and the intent behind the remarks may be less sinister than when used in conjunction with, or as a build up to, actual intended harm (whether physical or not).

Definitions can be misunderstood in other contexts as well. What happens when bad relationships becomes verbally abusive; when a couple shout insults at each other – perhaps frequently and with both parties being culpable – is this domestic abuse? Could the potential for a physical or verbal ‘assault’ on either party mean that police (or other agency) intervention is required or necessary? Arguments, discussions (heated or otherwise) and even occasional ‘outbursts’ may help to resolve issues; releasing tension and may make relationships healthier and stronger. What happens if neighbours contact the police concerned due to the volume of arguments: would domestic ‘abuse’, rather than domestic ‘violence’, mean that police attendance is mandatory for a simple argument? Are all relationships which encounter rough periods of time to be subject to monitoring, intervention and even prosecution? This is obviously not what is anticipated when domestic abuse was utilised as a term over and above domestic violence; nonetheless, definitions/terminology (and any interpretation thereof) remain subjective, even if guidelines are in place.

Perhaps one of the main problems with terminology is the method in which it creates confusion, misunderstanding and even apathy among agencies – and society as a whole – towards the crime of domestic violence itself. Is domestic violence a crime only if there is physical violence? Is it a crime if a husband shouts so loud that neighbours can hear him make derogatory comments towards his wife – perhaps not hearing her response because of the lower volume; does this constitute domestic abuse even if no violence occurs? Certainly this seems to be the implication in an extract of the Report of the Select Committee on Marital Violence (1975) from the Metropolitan Police: “…general principle of police…not to intervene in a situation…between husband and wife…in which the wife had suffered some personal attack, any assault upon a wife by her husband which amount to physical injury of a serious nature is a criminal offence…”. Here, the emphasis is on the physical injuries – though English law states that assault is the fear of physical harm rather than actual physical harm. This is known as a ‘technical assault’ whereby “the defendant intentionally or recklessly causes the victim to apprehend imminent force”. Psychological trauma can be suffered by the constant threat of physical harm as well as any physical injuries however; for such suffering, the Protection From Harassment Act 1997 may be utilised, though the conduct ‘causing fear’ must occur on at least two occasions (ss.1-3). Government publications use the term ‘domestic violence’ and ‘domestic abuse’ interchangeably – if the Government do not know the difference, how can anyone else?

One reason for the change in term from violence to abuse is that it may avoid the implication that only physical assault is criminal whereas ‘abuse’ suggests a variety of conduct used by partners. A broader term may help victims understand their partners’ actions are not acceptable. Problems may arise when boundaries of terminology and interpretation become blurred. Would a man be more likely to be targeted than his female partner if both technically committed the crime of ‘domestic abuse’ because of gender perception (i.e. that females in the relationship are more likely to be the victim than perpetrator, or that females are less likely to cause physical harm towards male partner)? Domestic violence may well be too narrow a term and restrict what people perceive to be a criminal offence and worth reporting. The approaches of various agencies in various locations may also make a difference; if a police force responds positively towards victims, if they are proactive in their dealings of domestic incidents because of a broader term of ‘abuse’ then utilisation of such terms may be justified. A more reflective interpretation of domestic abuse may result in police intervention earlier in situations which may otherwise be left until consequences are dire for both victims and their families.

The Scottish Executive has settled on ‘Domestic Abuse’ when discussing domestic violence throughout its policies and campaigns. Though it is difficult to find the reasons behind the decision, it was agreed in September 1999 to create the definition. In 1998, the Scottish Partnership on Domestic Abuse was set up and a National Strategy created to ensure women have access to the necessary agencies, assistance, etc.

In 2001, the Protection from Abuse (Scotland) Act was introduced and the definition therein states: ‘abuse’ includes violence, harassment, threatening conduct and any other conduct giving rise, or likely to give rise, to physical or mental injury, fear, alarm or distress’. A draft National Strategy was produced in October 2002: key elements included public awareness raising; education; training; services for women and children; work with men who use violence; legislation; and workplace strategies. The Strategy has produced various campaigns aimed at both perpetrators and victims but also indicates that neighbours, friends and others ought to be aware of domestic abuse and not to ignore the signs. The first of these campaigns began in 1995 and it was aimed at the perpetrators – shown specifically during programmes the majority of men would be likely to see (i.e. rugby and football world cups). For some people, however, it is not just a matter of terminology and interpretation; victims’ and perpetrators’ culture may mean that they do not see their situation as being the business of any outside agents.

Even internationally, communities rarely intervene for a country’s inadequate and antiquated domestic criminal justice policies and even then, it is usually because the victim(s) originated from a western country (i.e. Britain/USA) or because of pressure from media and/or celebrity sources. For some countries, crimes such as domestic violence may be interpreted as minor infractions, but in the UK and other countries, such relationships may be abusive or implicitly violent. Each culture has specific interpretations of what is domestic violence; for example, Sokoloff and Dupont studied experiences of Japanese women’s understanding of domestic violence: overturning a dining table, or pouring liquid over a woman is more significant to them than slapping or pushing. Sokoloff and Dupont correctly believe that, over and above the social constraints in place for some women to report abuse or abusive relationships, there may well be cultural constraints which further isolate women and enhance their victimisation. Further, should women from traditional insular communities reside in western society, they may be unwilling or unable to report domestic violence due to language barriers, fear of reprisals not only from their partners, but their own communities. This will be enhanced if the victim and/or her partner are illegal immigrants; not only would she bring authorities’ attention to her own immigration status, she may also raise awareness of a community previously unknown to authorities.

For the UK, the levels of control over a spouse/partner by perpetrators within the immigrant community (whether legal or otherwise) may be even more acute due to language, cultural and community barriers and restricted access to support agencies. Home Office research on the provision of ‘advocacy services’ to black and other ethnic minority women shows that problems can arise where and when women are uncertain as to their legal rights and what facilities are available to them and that multi-agency support and co-operation is essential in tackling domestic violence in such communities. In some cultures, victims and perpetrators may accept violence and/or abuse and may not believe such behaviour is wrong, let alone illegal. Even if the victim and/or perpetrator recognises that domestic violence/abuse is unacceptable, their country of origin may be unwilling to prosecute the perpetrator and protect the victim; what then for those who seek asylum? For those in England, the Law Lords have ruled that they may well be protected under the Geneva Convention – and thus attain the rights as refugees and gain protection of the English legal system and remain indefinitely.

Other problems prevail when using terminology or definitions which limit the ability of objective interpretation particularly by the police. As Edwards discusses in her book ‘Policing Domestic Violence’, the charity Violence Against Women puts forward the view that: “…police response…judgemental attitudes to the behaviour of women victims which they may consider contributory…the woman is ‘nagging’, ‘hysterical’, or a ‘sluttish housewife’.” Edwards further refers to Stanko who found that: “Decisions to arrest….charge a suspect with ‘disorderly conduct’ rather than assault…all affect how men’s threatening or violent behaviour comes to be defined as criminal or non-criminal”. Edwards refers to research by Chatterton who found one reason for the lack of police intervention is down to “…[a police officer's] decision not to arrest by referring to the moral characteristics of the father…counterposed against the mother who kept a slovenly home and was difficult and ‘mouthy’ “. Thus, the drunken husband or partner who is abusive towards the police is more likely to be arrested and charged as a domestic violent offender than the husband or partner who is calm, collected and uses manipulation more than violence to abuse his spouse, or who is considered to have been provoked by a horrid wife. Sympathy for the victim only occurs apparently when she fits the stereotype of weak and blameless wife or partner. Another factor may also be the victim’s appearance, i.e. would the more attractive woman be deemed helpless and thus gain higher levels of sympathy and ultimately intervention by the police.

Terminology and definitions can cause problems in other legal settings as well. In court, lawyers and judges may refer to the legally defined terms whilst victims, witnesses and even jurors may have an alternative understanding of the issues in contention. If the abusive behaviour in question is not physical, any reference to ‘domestic violence’ may be confusing as violence may be interpreted to mean physical injuries sustained. If no physical injuries were suffered, confusion may exist and wrong interpretations may lead to a different verdict had clarification been obtained. Alternatively, if ‘domestic abuse’ is referred to by lawyers, when there is obvious physical injury to the victim, there may be confusion as to what other actions are implied but not specified. Confusion may be exacerbated when the terms are used interchangeably and clarity is most definitely required when women defend themselves to the degree that their abuser dies and they are charged with murder and their defence is based on a history of abusive behaviour from their [now dead] partner. In such cases of ‘Battered Wife Syndrome’ there may also be ambiguity in relation to the problem of terminology: syndrome implies a medical nature behind a legal definition often used in defences against murder charges.

The term ‘domestic abuse’ over ‘domestic violence’ may broaden the scope and it may result in police officers interpreting the offence on a wider scale so including incidents which have not become physically violent, but are nonetheless harmful to the victim. With some incidents of domestic violence actually having little physical violence but with the victim feeling continually threatened, isolated and fearful that it could become violent, or that she (or he) is being manipulated in such a way that disables them from leaving, domestic abuse may help the police understand that intervention in such circumstances is not only acceptable but necessary. The Scottish Executive’s terminology and definition makes such an interpretation: “…can include physical abuse (assault and physical attack)…sexual abuse (acts which degrade and humiliate…perpetrated against their will…mental and emotional abuse (such as threats, verbal abuse, withholding money and other types of controlling behaviour such as isolation from family or friends)”. This gives a clear indication of the types of unacceptable and thus criminal behaviour which would constitute an offence making police intervention justified. Of course, others may need assistance in comprehending new terminology and definitions: neighbours, teachers (many children witness domestic incidents) and emergency room staff, as well as employers, etc. When domestic violence is denied as being the cause of stress or physical injuries, what should or could people do? When should they intervene and where would they go? Is it not easier for people to simply ignore the obvious as this constitutes a personal problem and one requiring intervention?

Whilst it may be up to society as a whole to deal with domestic violence in order to reduce its frequency, there are problems in attempting to alter attitudes and understanding of a situation so hidden or considered private. This is clearly evidenced by the Scottish Executive’s own research into the response by the public to their campaigns against domestic ‘abuse’. Respondents in 2005 and 2005/2006 showed little change in attitudes and understanding of domestic violence or domestic abuse. Whilst the research does make a caveat – that funding and availability of channels on which to show advertisements on domestic abuse were significantly different between the 2005 campaign and 2005/06 campaign, with the former having less available channels, the figures to appear to indicate that the public on the whole did not alter their perception of domestic abuse.

One method of dealing with the varying acts which constitute domestic violence could be to create a specific offence of ‘domestic abuse’ in statute; this offence should give definitions and meanings which have been widely consulted upon. As offenders are often charged with minor offences including ‘Breach of Peace’ or ‘Affray’ and/or the more serious offences such as ‘Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm’ and ‘Wounding’, it may well be that a specific offence of domestic abuse (or violence – depending on which is considered the best) would resolve some of the confusion. There is no doubt that causing severe alarm or distress and/or physical injury to a partner is unacceptable, but there are many varying degrees of abusive behaviour that, to have such behaviour subjected to various laws – some antiquated – confusion is a constant problem. If a specific offence were introduced, then the offence can be dealt with similar to other specific offences (e.g. arson, rape, criminal damage, etc.). Current offences can be incorporated in a list of actions which are deemed to fall within the remit of such an offence. Specific deterrent sentences can be identified, including rehabilitative and/or cognitive therapy programmes, as well as custodial methods; protection orders – with powers of arrest attached – could automatically be included. The police recognised in 1998 that the lack of a specific (and national) definition of ‘Domestic Violence’ was problematic: ‘The lack of a nationally agreed definition of domestic violence is a major obstacle…Agreeing a national definition is essential…” Whilst this was in relation to effective policy monitoring and to enable greater comparative analysis, it can be seen as indicative of problems widely experienced by officers. In 2000, it was noted that ‘standardised definitions of domestic violence and repeat victimisation between forces and other agencies’ were essential to ensure that domestic violence could be effectively policed. If the police, prosecution services and other agencies could refer to specific legislation or a specific offence, rather than rely on a plethora of offences with which to charge offenders, administrative and other bureaucratic problems may be reduced significantly.

One of the few (indeed probably the only) laws to actually specifically mention domestic violence is the Domestic Violence, Crimes and Victims Act 2004. However, the offence of ‘domestic violence’ is not actually specified, nor defined; it is simply an amendment and clarification of what may occur to those who breach ‘non-molestation orders’ and provides a review for those deaths which occurred within a domestic setting (referring to these as domestic homicides: s.9). This legislation relates to evidence and procedures and allows the introduction for cohabiting couples to be of the same sex – i.e. extending existing legislation to cover those in homosexual relationships. Other legislation deals by implication with domestic violence and the problems of witnesses who retract statements due to fear or for other reasons: prosecution authorities in England and Wales can utilise the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (s.23) where submission of written statements in the absence of oral evidence is allowed. However, authorities seem reluctant to utilise such laws as they rarely continue with cases when witnesses fail to attend. Indeed, the retraction of statements has long been a problem in many prosecutions of domestic violence and cited as the reasons for low conviction rates; however, given the wider problems faced by victims of domestic violence, it is unlikely to be the sole reason and, even if it were, should not dissuade authorities from prosecuting. Definitively categorising an abusive relationship, providing a specific term and defining the behaviour referred to as criminal (to include psychological, emotional, physical and financial behaviour) may assist in raising levels of conviction rates within this area of criminal behaviour.

Other reasons for low conviction rates may be juries’ lack of understanding given the multitude of charges brought. Charges can include common law assault, breach of peace, harassment or sexual assault, etc. These charges may mean juries only choose the one with which they have any understanding (however misconceived). Indeed, in Scots law, ‘assault’ seems even more abstract than English law; in Scotland, assault is “committed when one person makes an attack upon another with the intention of effecting the immediate bodily injury of that other person or producing fear of immediate bodily injury in his mind.” In English law, assault is committed by someone when he “causes another person to apprehend the immediate application…of unlawful force” or “Technical Assault. This offence is committed when the defendant intentionally or recklessly causes the victim to apprehend imminent force”. In the Protection From Abuse (Scotland) Act 2001, there is an interpretation of ‘abuse’ which: “…includes violence, harassment, threatening conduct and any other conduct giving rise, or likely to give rise to, physical or mental injury, fear, alarm or distress”. All these interpretations and definitions are undoubtedly causing confusion for those involved in the whole process.

The other side of the argument, however, is that bad relationships may be deemed criminal if definitions are too broad. As mentioned, relationships have good times as well as bad and argumentative couples are not unusual. Indeed, it can be seen as a good and healthy relationship when couples release tension through arguments, even if they are derogatory. Being insulted can be hurtful but the intent behind such behaviour is not always criminal. Whilst legislation such as the Protection From Abuse (Scotland) Act is for the protection of those who suffer (or are likely to suffer) systematic abusive behaviour, specifying that “…any other conduct giving rise, or likely to give rise to…alarm or distress” is criminal, it can result in confusion. Further, control finance is commonly seen as one person’s strength in a relationship; for various reasons – not all of them malicious. Partners have on occasion pushed each other, held each other (or restrained due to alcohol, drug use, for protection against the partner harming themselves due to emotional turmoil or medical conditions, e.g. epilepsy).

It is not necessarily being suggested here that a husband who protects his wife from her own self-harming actions could or would be subjected to police intervention under current definitions, but confusion may arise. Where there are isolated incidents of ‘hurting’ or ‘insulting’ behaviour, this is not to be deemed criminal, not to be considered domestic violence. However, in the litigious society we now seem to be in, civil actions could draw in criminal codes and partners who seek revenge for various reasons could instigate domestic violence procedures under any broadened definitions. Most would accept that arguments cause alarm and/or distress in any form, particularly in marriages or partnerships given the nature of relationships but not all ‘bad patches’ should be subject to criminalisation.

Failed marriages whereby insults are thrown, withholding money because of legitimate concerns as to the ultimate destination by respective partners (e.g. a wife or husband who closes a bank account because they simply wish to avoid paying maintenance) may fall within the remit of domestic abuse because they are controlling money and refusing access. There is undoubtedly an element of spitefulness from one or both partners; this may include shouting and insulting each other. Whilst pragmatic approaches are undoubtedly expected from all agencies, complaints may arise if conduct is either ignored when it is in fact symptomatic of domestic abuse, or if over-zealous policing or prosecution interference results in action being taken where none is required. This is particularly likely to occur if different jurisdictions actually have different interpretations or definitions which deal with domestic violence. If officers in rural communities prefer to deal with domestic violence in a quiet, ‘dignified’ manner to keep families together and to protect reputations in small villages, whilst officers in the City centres are constantly arresting on the spot partners who are abusive, where is the consistency of policing domestic violence given that there are no national definitions and no specific offence of domestic violence.

Terminology can cause confusion, even discrimination, though it is doubtful there is any intention to do so. By broadening terms from domestic violence to domestic abuse, inclusion of acts by perpetrators which, if taken as a pattern of behaviour, show that domestic violence (physical or otherwise) is a problem within a particular household. Domestic abuse may well be preferred terminology for some agencies, including the police and prosecution authorities, but until we have a specific, definitive and statutory explanation of what domestic violence means (by providing clarity as to the acts which can constitute such an act or acts), prosecutions and conviction rates may remain low. Further, such legislation may enable the engagement of the public at large as awareness of a specific criminal offence can be more easily identifiable. A definitive statute/law shows not only that the Government will not tolerate domestic violence because it has specifically legislated against such behaviour, it will also assist the authorities and public to determine what is – and importantly – what is not, a criminal offence.

Domestic violence or abuse – whatever term is used – needs to be defined specifically to ensure that ambiguity is lost, that clarity is gained and that victims of this often hidden crime can point to a specific offence; it can be referred to by police officers when arresting a perpetrator, by prosecutors when bringing charges in court, and by judges when making summations to juries before they decide their verdicts. Juries may then make conclusions based on the evidence in answer to a specific offence when deciding upon guilt.

Policing this offence may not be easier, and prosecutions will still falter but by creating a specific offence and defining which actions are to be included, ambiguity is reduced and increased awareness occurs. Semantics is not the issue here; the issue is the need for effective policy, understanding by the public and the agencies involved in its dealings with such a wide (but hidden) problem. Altering perceptions, changing attitudes and providing assistance for domestic violence will all take time, money and interagency co-operation; offender programmes and education for young people to alter their views (given that many children witness violence in the home and their behavioural patterns, and understanding of violence as a problem-solving device) all need to be implemented. Otherwise we will continue to have a world full of hidden violence leading to distorted views as to what is acceptable behaviour towards others – particularly in the family home.

At in-dependency in 1960, the Nigerian population was about 50 million. Currently we are an estimate 158 million, meaning that 120 million Nigerians are below the age of 43 years. If those above 60 years are only about 38 million, it therefore means those between the ages of 18- 43 years are the majority. That is about 110 million. Registered voters are currently 130 million according to Electoral Commission of Nigeria, clearly more than half of those eligible to vote are 18 years and above. The pertinent question is therefore: where are the rest of potential voters as out of the 110 million registered voters, only less than 80 million voted in 2007?

The hard fact cannot be bailed out, as more than 142 million people by the Nigerian law are eligible to vote, excluding the ex-convict and the de-franchised.

Then the following ethical summations are put down figuratively:

o 20 million youth aged 18 and above have no Identity cards automatically eliminating them from the voting process.
o A significant number of them have no birth certificates therefore they do not exist.
o Majority (34.3%) of the youth who have votes are apathetic to the whole process. They feel their voting would not make a different.
o For the youth that vote, majority (32 million) vote for the wrong reasons such as: electing leaders from their ethnic groups even though they do not merit, electing those who have dished out the most money, peer pressure and often pressure from one’s family to vote for particular leader as a block.
o A large percentage of the youth watch at the periphery as they are ignorant of the importance of being in political party specifically in the mainstream politics were crucial decisions about a nation are made.
o Civic education has yet to fully incorporated and emphasized that there are youth who are great leaders and merit a chance.

As for those youth in mainstream politics, they face the following:

o Patronage; where senior party members do not create spaces for the youth to play crucial roles in the political parties.
o Lack of clear political party ideology and value system that guides the operation of the party and the conduct of its members indiscriminately especially on age and gender.
o Ethnicity where membership of most political parties is dictated by ethnicity stemming from the founders of the parties or the individuals that are funding it. This has caused chaos, and a lot of heartache for youth who find themselves barred from progressing or participating in crucial roles. The shift of loyalty, distrust, corruption and vertical solidarity determines who gets what within the political parties.
o Gender discrimination has had a negative impact on young ladies within the parties whose participation is limited and their contribution unrecognized. The culture of violence, mud slinging and character assassination has discouraged many competent young ladies from fully engaging in politics.
o Lack of resources, especially funding political activities and maintaining the required mechanisms.

In terms of the employment process, just like the political process and structure development paradigm, young people have the highest rate of unemployment and in many ways are the most vulnerable to the social depredations that are caused by unemployment and poverty. At the same time they are the promise of the future, and failure to invest in the young generation imposes great constraints on the potential for future development. Whether it is investing in the creation of decent work for young people which boosts the economy and lowers the demand for social services, or whether it be supporting peer to peer models of HIV/AIDS education, or supporting youth in creating food security for their community, research has shown that investing in youth brings about healthier youth and healthier communities

STRATEGY AND MOBILISATION FOR YOUTH DEVELOPMENT

The federal Government and its Amnesty group of trustees, and other stakeholders such as NGOs, CLO and other Private donors are a multi-faceted strategy that focuses on recognizing the on-going work of youth on the key urban issues of: economic development; urban peace and conflict; HIV /AIDs; and environmental degradation. These four areas that has become paramount a leverage to resolving the unending national and regional conflicts both religious and economically motivated, that 73% perpetuated by the Youths. The core of the SC strategy is the recognition that youth have the capacity to be meaningfully engaged in urban development programmes. The SC through various youth development initiatives will be a vehicle to mobilize resources to support those most marginalized youth populations in initiating and sustaining youth led programmes.

Strategy 1

Creation of urban based youth resource centres that directly support youth led development issues, such as the Youth Development and rehabilitation, a program set up by various states and local government in Nigeria, especially glaring in the Nigeria Delta, Western, Northern and Eastern geopolitical zones of the country. The focus of these hubs will be a space for youth to organize youth-led programmes in the area of economic development, prevention of violence, and delivery of education and services on HIV /AIDs. This strategy is further outlined below.

Strategy 2

Training youth as peace builders: The World Youth Report 2009 states that a majority of warfare takes place in developing countries, particularly in Africa, where an estimated 200,000 young soldiers between the ages of 10 and 24 risk their lives in the course of armed conflict willed by adults. Even in countries not plagued by armed conflict, the youth have often been misused in the political arena. While their energy and enthusiasms are powerful tools in promoting social or political issues, they are also vulnerable to being misled and misused, often leading to disruptive results. Youth need to be involved in violence prevention strategies, not just conflict reaction strategies. Youth can take the lead. There is also an implementation strategy through collaboration between Federal government agencies (MYA) and their subs, local and national youth organizations, NGOs and local authorities focused on creating effective and sustainable models for urban youth development and employment in Nigeria.

Plans are now in place to assist in the design of other regions/states of the country since by virtue of its implementation in Niger Delta with the following objectives:

Objective of the SC Youth Centres Project:

- To encourage partnerships with relevant stakeholders in the delivery of youth development;
- To increase knowledge, skills and attitude change of young people;
- To respond to educational, socio-economic, recreational, emotional and psychological needs of young people in an integrated way;
- To encourage youth to have greater ownership of development;
- To offer leadership and mentorship to young people.

Six Key Areas of Intervention:

1. Employment and Entrepreneurship: To build capacity of youth to participate effectively in urban poverty reduction through training and by offering employment opportunities in self-employment, formal and informal sectors.

2. Governance and Advocacy: To enhance youth contribution towards better governance by promoting increased youth participation in local government matters, particularly those concerning youth development.

3. Health: To provide services aimed at preventing and solving reproductive health problems amongst the youth by provision of information, skills training, education on reproductive health, counseling and referral services.

4. Communication and Information: To establish mechanisms to effectively communicate and disseminate information to youth, youth organizations and other partners involved in youth work.

5. Environment and Resource Management: To strengthen youth engagement in the protection and improvement of the environment by promoting their participation in environmental justice and governance initiatives.

Needs for financial support:

- Establish satellite resource centres in informal settlements
- Define and initiate employment creation programmes, micro-credit programmes
- Enable more health services to be offered free
- Build more networks and partnerships both locally and internationally
- Provide the library with books and information
- Provide computers for office work and internet access
- Build employment training programmes including global mentoring and monitoring
- Establish a youth trust/small grants programme for entrepreneurship

This partnership has been constructed in order to learn from each other best practices regarding how to address the diversity of challenges facing youth today in urban communities, systems to enable them to make sustainable decisions, and the inter-generational transfer of values.

THE OBJECTIVE OF YOUTH DEVELOPMENT IN NATION BUILDING

A nation will add a feather to its cap and process of its development will continue if its ambitious, agile, virile and strong youths are guided on the right direction. The youths of a nation are powerful. They are agile and are inclined to work, but it is usually seen that the youths are unable to yield desired results for want of proper guidance.

Consequently, whatever they do neither it gives satisfaction to them nor does it fulfill the needs of the nation. Under these circumstances to speak of the welfare of Youth in Nation Building, and Human Capital Development is meaningless; until priority is giving to its articulate program that will set them in vogue.

The fact is that after independence the successive generations failed to carve the path of progress on right lines, simply because of the innocuous poor articulation of youths in government’s actions to make certain future decisions in terms of continuity. The moral question is, how can a nation be developed if its youths, those who are willing to undertake any kind of work, one would only but imagine how strenuous it will be, if they are not guided properly?

It will ultimately result in a chaotic situation like the one we are faced with, such as the issues of youth restiveness in the Niger Delta and in other parts of Nigeria and Africa. The society is divided and trapped in the cob-web of problems. Self interest has become dominant, corruption is rampant and what alarms us most is that the national character is on decline.

In order to attend to the problem prevalent with youth restiveness and their role in nation building in the region, there is need for overall human capital development. Because development brings together the production and distribution of commodities, and the expansion and use of human capabilities. For youth to lead a long and healthy life there is need for intellectual and socio-economic enlightenment on their rights, thereby creating those articulate acumen to navigate their paths in accessing resources needed for their decent living, and their involvement in Nation Building. This is where investing in human resource development amongst the timid youths of the Niger Delta, as part of the Federal Government’s “Operation Youth for Nation Building” strategy is imperatively of utmost concern and urgency. There is no gain saying nevertheless that the productive capacity of youths is wider than all other forms of wealth taken together, which perhaps is the centerpiece of this caption.

In my earlier paper presented on the lunching of the Edo State’s Directorate of Youth Affairs and Social mobilization; part of the paper quotes as follows:

The problem of youth restiveness is a mirage until recently when a coalition of civil liberty Organization, NGOs, Government and other international agencies expressed largesse concern over Youth Global development as they collectively and genuinely seek to address the ills and disproportionate spur of Youth affairs in government and their apartheid in Nation Building; such as in the Niger Delta and other parts of the country, with regard to Militancy, sectarian and religious violence, Illiteracy, unemployment, disempowerment etc.

Generally speaking, several militants and youth leaders might not hold the ace on how the solution to the economic, socio-political and environmental problems of the Niger Delta region and its timid youth. However if the region’s leaders and representative of various organization are truly sincere in the ongoing peace process, their actions are capable of creating a vacuum in the economic mainstream and survival of our federal hegemony – Nigeria. In order to facilitate steady and speedy youth capital and human development; there is need to address the following:

a. Provision of sufficient mechanism and infrastructure to boost youth capital initiative and sustainable development.
b. Initiate programme for youth interactive sessions and intellectual model in the discussion of issues such as youth restiveness, the society and economic development of youths in nation building, an agenda that reflects on the youth.
c. Discussing and articulating programs to quell corruption, political irresponsibility among political representative, and inefficiency within government systems and weak social safety.
d. Solution to uplifting the meager status of the youths in issues such as hunger, illiteracy, unemployment and economic disempowerment should be resolved, and programs should be set up at various quarters to attend to these problems.

With the above paradigm, different strategic indicators should be put in place to assume its full mandates of youth capital development by ending restiveness, militancy, violence and all forms of crisis in the Niger Delta region, both internally motivated, nationally alleged, or some sort of ‘International Oil Conspiracy’. Although it is also pertinent to remark that at the root cause and effect of youth conflict in the Niger delta and elsewhere in Nigeria is due to the high incidence of state failures over time to address certain economic, political and sociological issues affecting and reflecting albeit Youth Development. National leaders instead of focusing more on the federal process that brings about equitable development across the nation. The National Leaders are over indulging in paraphelia Federal structure which is suppresses the concept of peace building, and reneging Youth development in Nation Building.

The inability of the Niger Delta states to meet its primary social obligation notably youth and other socio-economic development provision and maintenance of internal order as well as its unconcealed order for misrule, epitomize a total failure of national leadership process and structure within and without.

Even though the youths of Niger Delta is wholly or partly marginalized and displaced, the historical pivotal causes of youth restiveness, which comprises of 96% youth force in Niger Delta region is nonetheless caused by the antecedent of greed, political ambition and individualized cause. This of course is an emphasis on the disunity that has rocked the region’s leaders, and basically for the lack of various established organization’s commitment in the region’s politics, as the leaders are not accountable and transparent; or simply, militant groups finds it difficult to focus on a common goal, vision and ideology of the region’s long national and economic deprivation over time, that makes the crisis seem even more complex, tactical and dangerous.

Let us give a helping hand to the young generation, uplift their morale to enable them to revive the national character and to carry on the process of national upliftment. It is also our duty and if we are indifferently disposed to it, we are certainly disregarding our duty towards the society and nation. Under such circumstances, we have no right to initiate peace process, because if we cannot find people in ourselves, therefore finding peace in others is impossible.

Encourage the youth in nation building is something that is character oriented, and if our leaders in government despise these salient issues, then it is glaring that they are profiting from the violence, and the current national quagmire.

YOUTH AND NATION BUILDING NETWORK

From the above analogy and largesse, the reason for CLO, NGOs and government participation in the facilitation towards ending the conflicts in the region between militants and multinational corporations on one hand, Government and Militants/Youths Leaders on the other hand, and coalition of the willing to prevent further crisis in the region, which houses the leaders and representative from Multinational Oil Corporations, Stakeholders in the peace process, the Government, civil liberty organization and the international community on another end, is to put an end to the violence and under-development in the region. The State and Federal government demonstration of amnesty initiative is a welcome development, and should be embraced by all stakeholders in the area in order to sue for dialogue.

The political independence is essential for the upliftment of a nation, but it is not the end. Much is to be achieved on social and economic fronts. Probably, the political independence was regarded as the ultimate goal. Therefore, the contemporary generation of youths was not given any definite guide-line; with the result they had no knowledge of their duties towards the society or the nation. To avoid further deterioration of the situation, it is necessary to guide the youths in right direction, so that they may engage themselves with the task of completing the unfinished process of upliftment of their nation.

The responsibility of preparing the background and creating a congenial environment in this respect lies with the intellectuals and the leaders of society. But if the leaders through pride and personal ego fail to realize these facts, then we will continue to embark on the enslaved marigold problems.

Separately, the government, NGOs and CLOs have been trying to mediate and facilitate peace process in the area through several MDGs projects, sustainable initiative with communities in the region, and to negotiate with youth leaders, warlords; who because of lack of cooperation and misplaced agenda have been fighting themselves over ethnic, religious and political matters and not because of the plight of their people (Asakitikpi, 2007). These are indeed reasons why any form of peace process in the area has failed, why the Amnesty initiative of the federal government and genuine stakeholders in the Niger Delta will not work, if these leaders through a forum of sincere peace builders in line with government’s plans for development do not come together through consensus.

Asakitikpi went further:

“The headline which quote Alhaji Dokubo as stating that ‘we must control our resources’, suggest the he – Dokubo is not fighting for the rights of his people to have control their resources, but for powerful individuals like himself”.

Going by Asakitikpi’s analogy, it is to say that while there are no genuine youth leaders, other than illustrious personalities like Isaac Adaka Boro, Professor Ake and their likes; the manner in which some of the claimed freedom fighters, Militants (MEND) and co, Youth Leaders and their various administrative structures are composed is not to say beyond measure, unacceptable. Literarily we are all aware of the bunkering episode that brought some of these leaders to financial fame, and the criminal activities to convert federal and state laws into personal enterprise. One must quickly re-visit the differentiation between legitimate leadership structure and a mob operated scheme, which at certain time terrorized the inhabitants of their communities those who stood in their way of justices and legality. These Militants leaders that preaches irrelevancy of the amnesty package today were also instrumental to the building of the foundation along with militarized economic misnomer of the antecedent of military regime, the inability of a decent society across the region. Will it not be refuted with regard to the rationality of these leaders’ genuine course for development in the area, when they were actors in the vandalization of the moral and economic good of their host communities; while circumventing their people and playing the gimmicks with Multinational Corporations and shady government officials? In my Ernest opinion, those leaders that will reject the amnesty initiative of the Federal government are the real terror of the region, and they should face the full blow of the law.

This is indicative of Alhaji Asari Dokubo’s recent nationwide activities as per the crisis in the region, and his docile and incurrent acumen to fully comprehend the dynamics and sincerity as an in-depth mythology of the peace building and Youth development initiative of the region. The reason for this exercise is, for both the Federal Government, MNCs, NGOs, CLOs and Militants Groups to admittedly compensate the people of the region of the havoc melted on them, for the long years of economic degradation, political marginalization, economic deprivation, and barricading terror weighed on them by both Military operations of the Federal Government in their drive to eliminate Militants, and Guerilla warfare on them by Militants.

Through Nation Building, empowerment of Youths in its entire ramification is likely to lead to human capital development which in turn is expresses to reduce the tendency towards anti-social behaviours that affects societal norms, ethics and values. Youth development is not about increase capacity in terms of knowledge and skill acquisition as pronounced in so many organizations’ mission statements nowadays, rather it equally requires that individuals have access to capital so that their means of livelihood could be sustained and realized. A decent society where there is a wide gap between the rich and poor creates the condition for desperation and the undermining of societal values as individuals will do anything possible to avert poverty by any means. This should be discouraged by creating a forum for filling these society gaps, such as government’s concentration on youth development in nation building, as they are the leaders of tomorrow, and the workforce of present and very near future.

POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT

This project conception was initiated, in part, to describe why a “shift in approach” has been advocated for how we address youth issues in this country. We are going to be focusing on the ways in which differing points of view have converged to form the field of positive youth development in recent Nigerian centric polity. With the twenty first century’s “discovery” of childhood and adolescence as special periods in which children should be given support to learn and develop, society assumed an increased sense of responsibility for the care of its young people.

Increases in juvenile crime and concerns about troubled youth led in the 2007 of the commencement of the Yar ‘Adua Administration in the beginning of major federal funding initiatives to address these issues, which is collectively packaged and address in several initiative to booster youth sensitization and National identity. These trends accelerated during the 2008, as did national rates of poverty, economic degradation, and other bad government policies which indeed has been instrumental to violence; hence unfortunate returns to Nation building. In the summary put forward by (Nicholas Idemudia et al (2006) An Essay on the Nigerian Political society :)

Yet again, with the impressive research conducted in the early part of 1995 – 1996 by tow foremost American scholars and researchers;

Changes in socialization forces that have historically nurtured the development of children – especially in the family – necessitate reconceptualization of school and community practices to support the family in its mission to raise successful children (Hernandez, 1995, from Weissberg & Greenberg, 1997: 5).

Any Youth Development and Outreach Program should seek to promote the participation and leadership of Nigerian Youths and young people in the development process of nation building. The purpose wherefore should be to highlight the value that young people can play in the effort to build a region with stable democracies, sustainable economies, and equitable societies. By establishing alliances with the public and private sectors, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and youth, the government and all stakeholders should emphasize participation and leadership, entrepreneurial development, technology, and community service to the end of:

Empowering young people to become involved in their personal development and that of their communities, and advocating youth development and participation as an integral part of development; mainstreaming youth development and participation throughout the nation’s Ministry of Youths Affairs operations, and promoting inter-organisational partnerships to advance youth development and participation.

Although is difficult to implement at first hand, yet with systematic efforts to enforce actualization, the government through what this research material can offer give attention to issues which will turn out as effective than any other implementation one may think fit for Youth awareness campaign strategy.

Activities should include:

(1) YOUTH AND CAPACITY BUILDING: Capacity building, which involves creating training, initiatives and projects that develop the managerial, technical, entrepreneurial, and leadership skills of youth, so that they might become actors in the development process rather than the subjects of that process. Facilitation of communication among youth in the form of a regional network of more than 13.5 Million youth leaders and social entrepreneurs across Nigeria actively engaged in socio-economic activities who will serve as agents for development in their communities should be a government at all levels investment planning. In the area of outreach and communications, the creation of public awareness among the general public, government agencies, and the non-profit and private sectors on the contributions and value of youth participation and development. In addition, the programme should develop communication tools and promote the best practices and model programmes of youth development through conferences, audiovisual materials, publications, television programming, press articles, a quarterly newsletter, and The Youth Development and Outreach website such as those of the National Youth Council of Nigeria and several others.

(2) INTER-ORGANISATIONAL COLLABORATION: The creation of strategic alliances with public, private, and non-profit sectors to advocate for effective youth participation as agents for development in that region through information exchange, project collaboration, resource mobilisation, and dissemination of best practices promotion of the importance of Inter-Regional collaboration and inter-agency partnerships to better respond to the needs of youth representation of the MYA in the Geopolitical Working Group on Youth Development (GPWGYD)), a consortium of National donor agencies (such as philanthropist, Governments, and national NGOs) that supports new approaches to positive youth development and participation in Niger Delta and Nigeria as a Nation. Intra-agency mainstreaming, that is, the development of internal alliances with other departments and MYA parastatal Offices to integrate youth development and participation into the Federal government through the MYA’s mission and project pipeline, and Policy advocacy and formulation that promotes a supportive policy environment for youth development and participation by engaging in policy formulation initiatives with other partners.

YOUTH ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IN NATION BUILDING

It is now obvious that the future of Nigeria lies in good leadership and those responsible are without dispute young leaders. We all agree that good governance, democracy, constitutionalism and nation building are heavily shaped by the quality of a country’s politics. If the future of Nigeria lies in the youth, how then can space be created in the mainstream politics to realize it? Let us take the antecedent of Ghanaian political scene for example.

The overarching goal of the present Administration’s initiative is to mobilize and harness the abundant resources of Nigeria’s youth towards improving the quality of life in cities and towns with a view to empower vulnerable urban youth groups for improved socio-economic inclusion and development.

Imperatively, a new dawn has emerged where the luxury of comfortably sitting back and complaining as youth has long gone. Nigeria cannot continue being a continent of succession without successors, youth leaders are the best alternative. With regard to the researches conducted over time, both in Nigeria, United States, Europe, Asia, The Caribbean and South America, some of the forward include:

o Legal backing through Political Party Bills, a strong National Youth Policy and lobbying for Affirmative Action Bills for the youth (The MYA has through the Federal initiative calculated efforts to make this possible amidst its National Agenda).

o Strategies on resource mobilization to support potential youth election candidates, civic education with a special focus on the critical role of youth, networking and coordination of youth activities to form a platform where we speak in one voice and push our agenda, working with media for the benefit of youth and building their capacity as leaders who work with and for the people they represent and thus, the community at the grassroots. Encourage youth to join sound political parties.

o Youth have to develop good leadership skills and learn from others. Practice leadership that enables positive transformation in our countries.

o Focus and scope of leadership should not be limited to politics and national level; it should transcend boundaries into regional and international levels. We should be able to have competent youth representatives in such bodies. It is imperative to adapt universally accepted value systems, broaden our knowledge by exposing ourselves to what youth leaders and leaders from other age-groups and countries are engaged in, learn and adapt what works best.

In order to implement the youth initiative both nationally and locally, all the stakeholders in youth awareness and mobilisation should kick-off with their own style of campaign coupled with statutory funding; where agenda are specified and accessed by a committee. A key focus of these partnerships will be to take the local initiatives of youth nationally as expression by the Mission statement of the National Youth Council of Nigeria (NYCN) and the National Youth Initiative Forum (NYIF), and this is to ensure it bring them all, collectively to a level in which they can be shared with other youth, researchers and policy makers. This effort is unique in its approach in that it starts from the belief that youth are agents of change within their communities. Most development programmes see youth as being the problem, on whom development programmes can fix. They treat youth as passive receptors, unable to act, and needing to be acted upon. This in recent time have been refuted, gnashed at and fought with the last youth blow ever known. It is unacceptable, and any political process that encourages such a misconception and misrepresentation of the ideology of the youth as the fountain of nation building is doomed to fail, and research indicates that such a process will continue to fail.